Systematic review and meta-analysis of left atrial appendage closure's influence on early and long-term mortality and stroke

Objective

Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) concomitant to heart surgery in patients with underlying atrial fibrillation (AF) has gained attention because of long-term reduction of thromboembolic complications. As of mortality benefits in the setting of non-AF, data from both observational studies and randomized controlled trials are conflicting.

Methods

On-line databases were screened for studies comparing LAAC versus no LAAC concomitant to other heart surgery. End points assessed were all-cause mortality and stroke at early and longest-available follow-up. Subgroup analyses stratified on preoperative AF were performed. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% CIs served as primary statistics.

Results

Electronic search yielded 25 studies (N = 660 [158 patients]). There was no difference between LAAC and no LAAC in terms of early mortality. In the overall population analysis, LAAC reduced long-term mortality (RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.74-1.00; P = .05; I 2 = 88%), reduced early stroke risk by 19% (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.72-0.93; P = .002; I 2 = 57%), and reduced late stroke risk by 13% (RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.84-0.90; P < .001; I 2 = 58%). Subgroup analysis showed lower mortality (RR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72-1.01; P = .06; I 2 = 91%), short-, and long-term stroke risk reduction only in patients with preoperative AF (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.71-0.93; P = .003; I 2 = 71% and RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.84-0.91; P < .001; I 2 = 70%, respectively). No benefit of LAAC in patients without AF was found.

Conclusions

Concomitant LAAC was associated with reduced stroke rates at early and long-term and possibly reduced all-cause mortality at the long-term follow-up but the benefits were limited to patients with preoperative AF. There is not enough evidence to support routine concomitant LAAC in non-AF settings.

Head-to-head comparison between left atrial appendage occlusion and non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis study

Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) was found to be non-inferior to warfarin. In non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF), there is still a scarcity of data comparing LAAO versus non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs). Our purpose was to compare the clinical benefits between LAAO and NOACs in non-valvular AF patients. The patient, intervention, comparison, and outcome principles were used to develop the research question in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Literature searches were conducted in online scientific databases such as ProQuest, PubMed, and ScienceDirect. All important information was extracted. The random-effect model was applied to estimate all pooled effects. The Mantel-Haenszel statistical method was used to determine the pooled risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). A total of 4411 participants from 5 studies were involved. LAAO significantly decreased the cardiovascular mortality risk compared to NOACs (RR = 0.56; 95% CI = 0.42 to 0.75; p <0.01). Major bleeding risk in the LAAO group was significantly lower than in the NOACs group (RR = 0.66; RR = 0.53 to 0.82; p <0.01). A significantly lower risk of major bleeding or non-major bleeding in the patients receiving LAAO than NOACs was also observed in this meta-analysis (RR = 0.66; 95% CI = 0.54 to 0.81; p <0.01). LAAO was superior to the NOACs in reducing cardiovascular mortality, major bleeding, and major or non-major bleeding risks in non-valvular AF patients. In high-risk thromboembolism and bleeding patients, LAAO can be considered first as a long-term treatment strategy.

5-year stroke rates in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation after watchman compared to direct oral anticoagulants

BACKGROUND

The WATCHMAN device (Boston Scientific; Marlborough, MA, USA) is noninferior to warfarin in preventing ischemic strokes while reducing bleeding risks associated with long term anticoagulation in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AFib). The device's performance compared to direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) is less well known.

OBJECTIVE

To compare 5-year major bleeding and ischemic stroke rates in patients with nonvalvular AFib who received a WATCHMAN device or DOAC therapy after a major bleeding event.

METHODS

This retrospective, multicenter, 1:1 matched cohort study was derived from the PearlDiver Mariner database from 2010 to 2020. Patients with nonvalvular AFib on oral anticoagulation who had a major bleeding event were identified. Those who received either WATCHMAN or DOAC after resolution of the bleeding event were selected. The two groups were exactly matched 1:1 based on various comorbidities. Rates of ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), major bleeding, and hemorrhagic stroke were compared over 5 years.

RESULTS

Each cohort consisted of 2248 patients after 1:1 matching. The mean CHADS2-VASC score was 4.81 ± 1.25. At 5 years, the WATCHMAN cohort had significantly lower rates of major bleeding events [OR 0.24 (0.21, 0.27)], TIAs [OR 0.75 (0.58, 0.95)], and ischemic strokes [OR 0.72 (0.61, 0.86)]. There was no significant difference in hemorrhagic strokes [OR 1.14 (0.83, 1.58)].

CONCLUSION

Even in a high-risk population, the WATCHMAN is comparable to DOAC therapy in the primary prevention of hemorrhagic strokes and may provide benefit in the rates of bleeding events, TIAs, and ischemic strokes.

Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Left Atrial Appendage Closure and Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Atrial Fibrillation: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Control Trials and Observational Studies

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). This meta-analysis was conducted as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. Two investigators performed an online database search on PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases from inception to October 31, 2023, without any language or time restrictions. Outcomes assessed in this meta-analysis included all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, stroke, and major bleeding events. Eight studies were included in this meta-analysis, enrolling 7,629 participants with AF (4,287 in the DOAC group and 3,342 in the LAAC group). The pooled analysis showed that the risk of all-cause mortality was significantly higher in patients in the DOAC group compared to LAAC (relative risk (RR): 1.87, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.50 to 2.34). The risk of cardiovascular mortality was 1.60 times higher in patients receiving DOACs compared to those receiving LAAC (RR: 1.60, 95% CI: 1.12 to 2.28). The risk of stroke was not significantly different between the two groups (RR: 1.15, 95% CI: 0.95 to 1.41). In conclusion, LAAC for AF patients proves to be safe and effective for stroke prevention, exhibiting a superior profile in terms of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular events, and major bleeding compared to oral anticoagulation (OAC). These findings prompt consideration of LAAC as a preferred treatment for cardiovascular event prevention in high-bleeding-risk patients.

The Left Atrial Appendage and Atrial Fibrillation-A Contemporary Review

In patients with atrial fibrillation, the left atrial appendage may serve as the site of thrombus formation due to stasis that occurs within the appendage because of its shape and trabeculations. Although thrombus formation can be reduced by using anticoagulants, this may be contraindicated in some patients. The need for a better alternative treatment prompted the study of left atrial appendage occlusion for thromboembolism prophylaxis. Due to this, procedures that excise or occlude the left atrial appendage have gained attention because of their ability to prevent thromboembolic events. This article provides a comprehensive review of the left atrial appendage and its associated procedures' clinical utility.

Clinical Outcomes of Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Versus Switch of Direct Oral Antcoagulant in Atrial Fibrillation: A Territory-Wide Retrospective Analysis

Background Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) has emerged as an alternative to oral anticoagulation therapy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation, but data comparing LAAO with direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) are sparse. Methods and Results This cohort study compared LAAO (with or without prior anticoagulation) with a switch of one DOAC to another DOAC by 1:2 propensity score matching. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, ischemic stroke, and major bleeding. A total of 2350 patients (874 in the LAAO group and 1476 in the DOAC switch group) were included. After a mean follow-up of 1052±694 days, the primary outcome developed in 215 (24.6%) patients in the LAAO group and in 335 (22.7%) patients in the DOAC switch group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.94 [95% CI, 0.80-1.12]; P=0.516). The LAAO group had a lower all-cause mortality (HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.39-0.60]; P<0.001) and cardiovascular mortality (HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.32-0.73]; P<0.001) but similar risk of ischemic stroke (HR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.63-1.10]; P=0.194). The major bleeding risk was similar overall (HR, 1.18 [95% CI, 0.94-1.48], P=0.150) but was lower in the LAAO group after 6 months (HR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.51-0.97]; P=0.032). Conclusions LAAO conferred a similar risk of composite outcome of all-cause mortality, ischemic stroke, and major bleeding, as compared with DOAC switch. The risks of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality were lower with LAAO.

Direct oral anticoagulants versus percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion in atrial fibrillation: 5-year outcomes

BACKGROUND

LAAO is an emerging option for thromboembolic event prevention in patients with NVAF. We previously reported data on comparison between LAAO and DOAC at two-year follow-up in NVAF patients at HBR (HAS-BLED ≥3).

AIMS

Limited data are available on long term follow-up. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DOACs versus LAAO indication after 5 years.

METHODS

We enrolled 193 HBR treated with LAAO and 189 HBR patients with DOACs. At baseline, LAAO group had higher HAS-BLED (4.2 vs 3.3, p < 0.001) and lower CHADS-VASc (4.3 vs. 4.7, p = 0.005). After 1:1 PSM, 192 patients were included (LAAO n = 96; DOACs n = 96).

RESULTS

At 5-year follow-up the rate of the combined safety and effectiveness endpoint (ISTH major bleeding and thromboembolic events) was significantly higher in LAAO group (p = 0.042), driven by a higher number of thromboembolic events (p = 0.047). The rate of ISTH-major bleeding events was similar (p = 0.221). After PSM no significant difference in the primary effectiveness (LAAO 13.3% vs DOACs 9.5%, p = 0.357) and safety endpoint (LAAO 7.5% vs DOACs 7.5%; p = 0.918) were evident. Overall bleeding rate was significantly higher in DOACs group (25.0% vs 13.7%, p = 0.048), while a non-significant higher number of TIA was reported in LAAO group (5.4% vs 1.1%, p = 0.098). All-cause and cardiovascular mortality were higher in LAAO group at both unmatched and matched analysis.

CONCLUSION

We confirmed safety and effectiveness of both DOAC and LAAO in NVAF patients at HBR, with no significant differences in thromboembolic events or major bleeding were at 5-year follow-up. The observed increased mortality after LAAO warrants further investigations in RCTs.

Efficacy and safety of left atrial appendage closure compared with oral anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-matched studies

Backgrounds

Two recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the PROTECT-AF and the PREVAIL, showed that in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients, left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is comparable to oral anticoagulants (OAC) in the prevention of stroke and could also possibly reduce mortality. Nevertheless, this net clinical benefit was not confirmed in the most recent RCT comparing LAAC vs. OAC, the PRAGUE-17 trial.

Aim

aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LAAC compared with OAC among available high-quality studies.

Methods

A systematic search of electronic databases (Medline, Scopus, Embase and the Cochrane Library) was performed to identify eligible RCTs and observational studies with propensity score matching (PSM) analysis. PRISMA guidelines were used for abstracting data and assessing data quality and validity. Outcomes of interest were the occurrence of cardiovascular death (CVD), all-cause death, all-type stroke, and major bleedings.

Results

A total of 3 RCTs and 7 PMS studies involving 25,700 patients were identified. 12,961 patients received LAAC while 12,739 received OAC therapy. After a median follow-up of 2.6 years (IQR 2-4.4), patients who received LAAC had lower risk of CVD (RR = 0.62; 95%CI, 0.51-0.74, I2 = 0%), all-cause death (RR = 0.67; 95% CI, 0.57-0.78, I2 68%) and major bleedings (RR = 0.68; 95%CI, 0.48-0.95 I2 = 87%) compared with patients on OAC. No difference was found between the two groups regarding strokes incidence (RR = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.77-1.15, I2 = 0%).

Conclusions

According to this meta-analysis, LAAC has comparable efficacy in the prevention of stroke compared with OAC and a reduced risk of major bleedings, all-cause death and CVD that may be even larger with longer follow-up.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=269768, identifier CRD42021269768.

An Updated Meta-Analysis on the Clinical Outcomes of Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Closure Versus Direct Oral Anticoagulation in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

The availability of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) with known lower bleeding risk compared with warfarin have raised questions about the role of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC). We aimed to perform a meta-analysis to compare the clinical outcomes for LAAC versus DOACs. All studies directly comparing LAAC with DOACs up to January 2023 were included. The outcomes studied included the combined major adverse cardiovascular (CV) events outcomes, ischemic stroke and thromboembolic events, major bleeding, CV mortality, and all-cause mortality. Hazard ratios (HRs) and their 95% confidence interval were extracted or estimated from the data and pooled together with a random-effects model. A total of 7 studies (1 randomized controlled trial, 6 propensity-matched observational studies) were finally included, with a pooled population of 4,383 patients who underwent LAAC and 4,554 patients on DOACs. There were no significant differences between patients who underwent LAAC and patients on DOACs in terms of baseline age (75.0 vs 74.7, p = 0.27), CHA2DS2-VASc score (5.1 vs 5.1, p = 0.33), or HAS-BLED score (3.3 vs 3.3, p = 0.36). After a mean weighted follow-up of 22.0 months, LAAC was associated with significantly lower rates of combined major adverse CV event outcomes (HR 0.73 [0.56 to 0.95], p = 0.02), all-cause mortality (HR 0.68 [0.54 to 0.86], p = 0.02), and CV mortality (HR 0.55 [0.41 to 0.72], p<0.01). There were no significant differences in the rates of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism (HR 1.12 [0.92 to 1.35], p = 0.25), major bleeding (HR 0.94 [0.67 to 1.32], p = 0.71), or hemorrhagic stroke (HR 1.07 [0.74 to 1.54], p = 0.74) between LAAC and DOAC. In conclusion, percutaneous LAAC was found to be as efficacious as DOACs for stroke prevention, with lower all-cause and CV mortality. The rates of major bleeding and hemorrhagic stroke were similar. LAAC has a potential role to play in stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation in the era of DOACs, but further randomized data are needed.

Antithrombotic Management in AF Patients Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A European Perspective

AF is a highly prevalent disease, often requiring long-term oral anticoagulation to prevent stroke or systemic embolism. Coronary artery disease, which is common among AF patients, is often referred for myocardial revascularisation by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), which requires dual antiplatelet therapy to minimise the risk of stent-related complications. The overlap of AF and PCI is a clinical conundrum, especially in the early post-procedural period, when both long-term oral anticoagulation and dual antiplatelet therapy are theoretically indicated as a triple antithrombotic therapy. However, stacking drugs is not a desirable option because of the increased bleeding risk. Several strategies have been investigated to mitigate this concern, including shortening triple antithrombotic therapy duration and switching to a dual antithrombotic regimen. This review analyses the mechanisms underlying thrombotic complications in AF-PCI, summarises evidence surrounding antithrombotic therapy regimens and reports and comments on the latest European guidelines.

Left atrial appendage closure with the II generation Ultraseal device: An international registry. The LIGATE study

OBJECTIVES

To assess feasibility and safety of second-generation left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) Ultraseal device in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF).

BACKGROUND

LAAC with first-generation Ultraseal device (Cardia, Eagan, Minnesota) has been shown to be a feasible therapeutic option in patients with NVAF. However, there is a paucity of data regarding the novel second-generation Ultraseal device.

METHODS

All patients with NVAF undergoing second-generation Ultraseal device implantation between February 2018 and September 2020 were included in a multicenter international registry. Periprocedural and post-discharge events were collected through 6-month follow-up. Co-primary efficacy endpoints were device success and technical success while primary safety endpoint was in-hospital major adverse event (MAE) occurrence.

RESULTS

A total of 52 patients were included: mean age 75 ± 8, 30.8% women, mean HAS-BLED 3 ± 1. The device was successfully implanted in all patients. Technical success was achieved in 50 patients (96.1%). In-hospital MAEs occurred in three patients (5.8%). The incidence of 6-month all-cause death and major bleeding was 11.6% and 2.1%, respectively. No strokes, transient ischemic attacks, systemic embolisms, or device embolization were reported after discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Second-generation Ultraseal device implantation was associated with high success rates and a low incidence of peri-procedural complications. Larger studies with longer follow-up are warranted to further evaluate the safety and the efficacy of this device, especially at long-term follow-up.

Can intracardiac echocardiography completely replace transesophageal echocardiography to guide left atrial appendage closure?-The comparisons of intracardiac echocardiography with transesophageal echocardiography

Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is an effective means of preventing ischemic stroke in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is the primary imaging technique to guide LAAC. Its shortcomings, namely the use of general anesthesia and tracheal intubation, inevitably increase procedural risks. Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE), a novel imaging modality for guiding LAAC, has proven more advantageous over TEE due to use of local anesthesia, shortened procedural time, and reduced radiation exposure. This review highlights the differences between ICE and TEE guided LAAC, aiming to provide a reference for clinical decision-making.

Outcomes of cardiac surgery with left atrial appendage occlusion versus no Occlusion, direct oral Anticoagulants, and vitamin K Antagonists: A systematic review with Meta-analysis

Surgical left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is being used increasingly in the setting of atrial fibrillation but has been associated with procedural complications. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the outcomes of surgical LAAO with those of no LAAO and the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) using the PRISMA guidelines. A literature search was undertaken for relevant studies published between January 1, 2003, and August 15, 2021. Primary clinical outcomes were all-cause mortality, embolic events, and stroke. Secondary clinical outcomes included major adverse cardiac events (MACE), postoperative atrial fibrillation, postoperative complications, reoperation for bleeding, and major bleeding. There was a statistically significant 34% reduction in incidence of embolic events (odds ratio [OR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57–0.77, p < 0.001) and a significant 42% reduction in risk of MACE (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.38–0.88, p = 0.01) in patients who underwent LAAO.Surgical LAAO has the potential to reduce embolic events and MACE in patients undergoing cardiac surgery for atrial fibrillation. However, complete replacement of DOACs and warfarin therapy with surgical LAAO is unlikely despite its non-inferiority in terms of minimizing all-cause mortality, embolic events, MACE, major bleeding, and stroke in patients on oral anticoagulation therapies.

Impact of Left Atrial Appendage Closure Combined with Catheter Ablation on Endocrine and Mechanical Cardiac Function in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

Background

The combined procedure of left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) and catheter ablation (CA) is a safe and feasible therapy to treat patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, the effect of the combined procedure on cardiac function remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the changes in endocrine and mechanical function of the heart following the combined procedure.

Methods

This retrospective study included 62 consecutive patients who underwent the combined procedure of AF ablation and WATCHMAN LAAC and 62 sex and age-matched patients who only received AF ablation. During follow-up, patients were examined for brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels to represent endocrine cardiac function. Mechanical cardiac function was assessed during echocardiographic examination by means of the LA ejection fraction, LA strain (Ƹ), and LA strain rate (SR).

Results

(1) The BNP levels decreased acutely after the procedure, rose at day 3 postoperation, but trended downwards at 3 months postoperation in both groups. No significant difference was observed between the two groups. (2) LA ejection fraction, LA Ƹ, and SR exhibited a continuous upward trend over a 3-month follow-up in both groups. There was no significant difference in LA ejection fractions, SRe (the parameter of LA conduit function), and SRa (the parameter of LA booster pump function) between the two groups. However, the Ƹ and SRs (the parameters of LA reservoir function) improved in patients treated with CA alone.

Conclusions

The combined procedure of LAAC and CA significantly improved the endocrine and mechanical function of the heart. Compared to simple CA, based on CA with LAAC intervention, it does not significantly change LA endocrine function but may lead to a decline in the LA reservoir function.

Analysis of Influencing Factors of Compliance with Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulant in Patients with Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation and Correlation with the Severity of Ischemic Stroke

Nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) is associated with an increased risk of stroke and thrombus, and anticoagulant therapy is a key link in the prevention of stroke. At present, the anticoagulation rate of atrial fibrillation in China is low, and there are many factors affecting the adherence of patients with atrial fibrillation to anticoagulation. Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are anticoagulant with high application value due to their high safety and low risk of intracranial hemorrhage, stroke, and death. However, the compliance of NOACs is poor, and the current situation of anticoagulants in China is not optimistic. In this study, a total of 156 patients with NVAF who received NOAC anticoagulation therapy in our hospital from January 2018 to January 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. The results showed that education background, place of residence, number of complications, CHA2DS2-VASc score, and HAS-BLED score were independent influencing factors for NOACS compliance of NVAF patients. Also, the Pearson correlation analysis showed that there was a negative correlation (r = −0.465, P < 0.001) between NOAC compliance and severity of ischemic stroke in patients with NVAF. Therefore, clinical supervision and management of patients with NVAF after NOACs should be strengthened to improve the compliance of patients with NVAF after NOACs, reduce the damage of ischemic stroke, and improve their prognosis.

Clinical Outcomes Associated With Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Versus Direct Oral Anticoagulation in Atrial Fibrillation

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to investigate clinical outcomes associated with left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) versus direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with high-risk atrial fibrillation (AF).

BACKGROUND

LAAO has been shown to be noninferior to warfarin for stroke prevention in AF. However, anticoagulation with DOACs is now preferred over warfarin as thromboprophylaxis in AF.

METHODS

Patients with AF enrolled in the Amulet Observational Registry (n = 1,088) who had successful LAAO with the Amplatzer Amulet device (n = 1,078) were compared with a propensity score-matched control cohort of incident AF patients (n = 1,184) treated by DOACs identified from Danish national patient registries. Propensity score matching was based on the covariates of the CHA₂DS₂-VASc (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years, diabetes mellitus, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack or thromboembolism, vascular disease, age 65-74 years, sex category) and HAS-BLED (hypertension, abnormal renal or liver function, stroke, bleeding, labile international normalized ratio, elderly, drugs or alcohol) scores for predicting stroke and bleeding. The primary outcome was a composite of ischemic stroke, major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium ≥3), or all-cause mortality, and follow-up was 2 years.

RESULTS

AF patients treated with LAAO had a significantly lower risk of the primary composite outcome as compared with patients treated with DOACs (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.49 to 0.67). Total events and event rates per 100 patient-years were (LAAO vs. DOACs) 256 vs. 461 and 14.5 vs. 25.7, respectively. The risk of ischemic stroke was comparable between groups (HR: 1.11; 95% CI: 0.71 to 1.75), while risk of major bleeding (HR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.49 to 0.79) and all-cause mortality (HR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.43 to 0.64) were significantly lower in patients treated with LAAO.

CONCLUSIONS

Among high-risk AF patients, LAAO in comparison with DOACs may have similar stroke prevention efficacy but lower risk of major bleeding and mortality.

Comparison of Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion versus Non-Vitamin-K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulation in High-Risk Atrial Fibrillation: An Update

Transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is non-inferior to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in preventing thromboembolic events in atrial fibrillation (AF). Non-vitamin K antagonists (NOACs) have an improved safety profile over VKAs; however, evidence regarding their effect on cardiovascular and neurological outcomes relative to LAAO is limited. Up-to-date randomized trials or propensity-score-matched data comparing LAAO vs. NOACs in high-risk patients with AF were pooled in our study. A total of 2849 AF patients (LAAO: 1368, NOACs: 1481, mean age: 75 ± 7.5 yrs, 63.5% male) were enrolled. The mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4.3 ± 1.7, and the mean HAS-BLED score was 3.4 ± 1.2. The baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups. In the LAAO group, the success rate of device implantation was 98.8%. During a mean follow-up of 2 years, as compared with NOACs, LAAO was associated with a significant reduction of ISTH major bleeding (p = 0.0002). There were no significant differences in terms of ischemic stroke (p = 0.61), ischemic stroke/thromboembolism (p = 0.63), ISTH major and clinically relevant minor bleeding (p = 0.73), cardiovascular death (p = 0.63), and all-cause mortality (p = 0.71). There was a trend toward reduction of combined major cardiovascular and neurological endpoints in the LAAO group (OR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.64-1.11, p = 0.12). In conclusion, for high-risk AF patients, LAAO is associated with a significant reduction of ISTH major bleeding without increased ischemic events, as compared to "contemporary NOACs". The present data show the superior role of LAAO over NOACs among high-risk AF patients in terms of reduction of major bleeding; however, more randomized controlled trials are warranted.

Effect of Left Atrial Appendage Closure in Combination With Catheter Ablation on Left Atrial Function for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation

Background: A single procedure combining left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) plus catheter ablation (CA) has been proven to be safe and feasible for treating atrial fibrillation (AF). However, the influence of treatment modality on left atrial (LA) function is not thoroughly explained.

Objective: We aimed to investigate the changes of LA function in persistent AF patients undergoing concomitant LAAC and CA.

Methods: The study population comprised 65 patients who underwent combined AF ablation and Watchman LAAC (combined therapy group) in our center, and 65 participants of the AF simple ablation group who were matched based on sex, age, CHA₂DS₂-VASc score and HAS-BLED score using propensity score matching. During the 1-year follow-up period, two-dimensional echocardiography and speckle tracking echocardiography were performed to assess LA reservoir, conduit, and contractile function.

Results: The combined therapy was associated with a significant improvement in the LA reservoir function with increased expansion index and strain indices, including strain and strain rate (SR) during ventricular systole. Conduit function with SR during early ventricular diastole was also improved, as was contractile function with active atrial emptying fraction and SR during atrial systole. Similarly, LA reservoir and contractile function indices all improved continuously during follow-up after catheter ablation alone. At 3 months follow-up LA reservoir and conduit function with strain indices had a tendency to improve only in the simple procedure group. At 1-year follow-up there was no significant difference in either LA volumes or strain indices between the two groups.

Conclusion: Both the combined therapy group and the simple ablation group demonstrated significant improvement in LA function. Based upon the fact that LA function was improved in both groups it might be concluded that most of the effects appeared to result from ablation, not LAAC; furthermore the additional LAAC procedure did not affect the improvement of LA function after CA.

Cerebral Protection Devices during Transcatheter Interventions: Indications, Benefits, and Limitations

Purpose of Review

Stroke remains a devastating complication of cardiovascular interventions. This review is going to discuss stroke rates and outcomes in different cardiovascular procedures with a highlight on the current evidence for the use of cerebral protection devices (CPD).

Recent Findings

Depending on the quality of neurological assessment, stroke occurs in up to 9.1% after TAVI, 3.9% after mitral clipping, 3.1% in LAAO patients, 0.4% after PCIs, and 1.8% after catheter ablation. CPDs are available for routine use. They are easy to use in most anatomies, feasible, and safe. Data on clinical impact and stroke reduction from RCTs are still missing.

Summary

Most evidence for the routine use of CPDs exists in TAVI patients, who are at the highest risk. The PROTECTED TAVI RCT will shed more light on the clinical impact of CPD-use in TAVI patients. In other cardiovascular procedures like mitral clipping, PCIs, and ablation, the current data do not support the routine use of CPDs in these patients.